THE DISPLACEMENT OF THE HEROIC

IDEAL IN THE FAMILY SAGAS

Br THEODORE M. ANDERSSON

WALTHER GEHL began his study of saga ethics by stating: "Ehre ist die innerste
Triebkraft altgernianischen Lebensgefiihls."1 The other treatises on saga ethics
agree and suggest that there is a continuity of values from heathen literature
to the sagas and that the demands of honor remain constant. Despite the deep
divisions in opinion on most problems connected with the sagas, there seems to
be perfect unanimity in this particular area. Vilhelm Gr0nbech depicted Germanic
honor in the sagas as a feeling of personal integrity vital to the individual.2
Whenever a man's honor is compromised, his integrity is damaged and must be
restored; hence the demand for blood revenge required to keep the integrity of
the family intact. This revenge is an automatic response. It does not spring from
a sense of justice, or retaliation ("eye for an eye"), or vindictiveness, but from
a man's feeling of responsibility to himself and his sense of his own honor,
which is an unnegotiable standard.
Gehl anchored the saga mentality no less firmly in honor. The Germanic sys-
tem of values distinguished not between good and evil (p. 23), but between honor
and dishonor. In a chapter entitled "Die Unbedingtheit der Ehrforderung" he
stated: "Das Ehrgebot gilt umimschrankt, vor ihm zerbrechen alle anderen
menschlichen Bindungen."3 The literary application in the sagas is clear: "Der
Ehrenhandel ist schlechthin das Sagaraotiv. . . . Alle anderen Motive sind
daneben bedeutungslos und vereinzelt."4 Within the framework of the sagas
Gehl established an evolution of honor: at the earliest stage it is taken for granted
and not belabored (Hdvamdl, Heidarviga saga, Hdvardar saga, Hrafnkels saga);
at a later stage it becomes more self-conscious and develops into drengskapr,
a spirit of chivalry which imposes respect for another man's honor as well as one's
own {porsteins pdttr stangarhQggs, Gisla saga); the final development veers
either in the direction of meaningless imitation (Vatnsdccla saga) or a flouting
of the concept {Bandamanna saga).
The primacy of honor is similarly maintained by Hans Kuhn:
Der hochste Besitz des Germanen und der entscheidende Masstab fiir alles, was er tat
und liess, war seine Ehre und der Ituhm, der ihn iiberleben sollte. Darin stimmen Helden-
lied und Preislied des rein kriegerischen Adels, die Spruckdichtung des friedliebenden
kleineren Bauerntums und die Saga der zwischen ihnen stehenden Schicht der islandischen
Adelsbauern vollstandig uberein.5
1
Walther Gehl, Ruhm. und Ehre bei den Nordgermanen: Studien zum Lebensgefuhl der islandischen
Saga (Berlin, 1937), p. 7.
* Vilhelm Grjtebech, Vor folketet i oldtiden (Copenhagen, 1955), i, 57-107. This is a revision of the
original edition of 1909-12.
* Gehl, p. 40.
«Ibid., 73.
* Hans Kuhn, "Sitte und Sittlichkeit" in Germanische Altertumskunde, ed., Hermann Schneider
(Munich, 1938), p. 215.

575
.57(> Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

The same point of view is reiterated in the most readily available general
book on the sagas by Peter Hallberg, where we find the following formulations:
"Honor (Icelandic, somi, smmZ, virding, etc.) is ethically the key concept in the
world of the Icelandic saga. This was not an abstract idea, but a deep and pas-
sionate experience, a condition of life as basic and essential as one's daily bread."
"The people of the sagas must always be on the alert, ready at all times to fight
to preserve their honor." "Honor was a precious and irreplaceable possession
which was not to be squandered and on which everything depended which made
life worth living."6
That Gehl's conclusions continue to go unchallenged is indicated by Oskar
Bandle's recent comments on the problem:
^Yie vor allem Walter Gehl gezeigt hat, ist das Ehrgebot uberall wirksam, ist iiberhaupt
das ganze Lebensgefuhl der Saga vom Ehrbegriff beherrscht. Er besitzt geradezu scliick-
salshafte Bedeutung, und er kann — wie weitgehend auch in der Heldendichtung — als
Hauptmotiv und als primus motor alien Geschehens in der Islandersaga bezeichnet
werden.7
Despite general agreement this viewpoint strikes me as doubtful. It is arrived
at through partial interpretation of the texts; especially Gehl (Gr0nbech re-
mains the subtlest and best-balanced moral interpreter of the sagas) tended to
single out scenes from various sagas in which personal honor appears in a positive
and admirable light. There are many such episodes and no dearth of illustrative
material, but the procedure is one-sided. It involves a neglect of episodes which
depict personal honor in a less favorable light and it takes the episodes it does
interpret out of context. As we progress, we will have occasion to observe fre-
quently how the commentators have skewed the moral by disregarding the larger
context and interpreting episodically.
The perspective changes if we substitute an integral reading for an episodic read-
ingand interpret thesagas as a whole. We find then that honoris not really "schlech-
thin das Sagamotiv" and that there are other more important values, values
which are in fact directly inimical to honor. But this view is based on the supposi-
tion that it is possible to interpret a saga as a whole, a supposition which is not
generally made, let alone accepted. The Icelandic saga, by common consent,
exemplifies literature focused on the "internal fiction";8 it has tacitly been re-
garded as a genuinely one-dimensional narrative with no discernible theme.
To my knowledge no one has asked what the point of a saga is. On the contrary,
the appropriateness of the question has been explicitly denied. Gr0nbech wrote:
"The old literature has no synthetic viewpoint, an absolute predetermined sum,
which is merely calculated in the story in order to be proven."9 Gehl wrote to the
6
Peter Hallberg, The Icelandic Saga, trans., Paul Schacli (Lincoln: Nebraska University Press,
1962), pp 99-100.
7
Oskar Bandle, "Islandersaga und Heldendichtung," Afmailisrit J6ns Helgasonar (Reykjavik,
1969), pp. 12-13. For a fresh approach see Hermann Palsson, Si'dfraefii Hrafnkels sb'gu (Reykjavik,
1966), esp. pp. 21-23.
8
See Northrop Frye, The Anatomy of Criticism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957),
p. 52.
9
Grjfobech, i, 91.
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas o i i

same effect: "In der Saga gibt es keinen 'rnoralischen Uberbau,' von dem aus die
einzelnen Gestalten beurteilt werden;. . ."10
The reason for the rejection of a moral or thematic framework in the sagas
lies in part in their deceptive objectivity and in part in the traditional view that
the sagas are history, a record of events or traditions about events without a "con-
ceptual interest."11 But now that the sagas are closer to being accepted as imagi-
native literature, it is perhaps time to raise the question of theme; is a given saga
just a story, or is there some underlying concern which informs the events and
which requires interpretation? Does the author impose values on the action,
and if so, is the chief value really honor? Are the real heroes of the sagas the men
who guard their honor most sedulously, and if not, who are the real heroes?
The passage quoted from Gr0nbech above is apropos of a thematic crystalliza-
tion of the porolfr prelude to Egils saga, a crystallization which Gr0nbech pro-
poses and then dismisses as distorting the balance and impartiality of the saga.
He suggests that the episode is: "About a noble hero, who stumbles on his own
nobility, whom fate, so to speak, overcomes with his own virtues;. . . "12 But a
little later: "One gets tired of catching oneself in this sort of aesthetic indul-
gence."13 Is such a characterization really just aesthetic indulgence and does a
thematic distillation really distort the text? porolfr is indeed a noble hero and
the author is at no small pains to burnish his image and enlist the reader's
sympathy. On the other hand, he does stumble over his own nobility, and not
simply because of a malevolent fate. His honor requires him to antagonize the
sons of HildirioY by making no concessions in their dispute over a legacy, his
honor requires him to alienate the king by a suspicious display of grandeur, and
ultimately his honor requires him to clash openly with royalty. J>6rolfr is an
exemplar of nobility, but he is also a proud, ambitious, and uncompromising
figure. Would he have been less noble if he had placated the sons of HildiriSr,
had indulged in less pomp, and had deferred to the king? It seems to me that
the author is at equal pains to depict porolfr's high-mindedness and his haughty
and ill-fated conduct, and that this discrepancy suggests a theme: the theme
is the fine line between honor and pride. In short, Gr0nbech's formulation, "a
noble hero who stumbles over his own nobility," is a very good one. Is porolfr
not perhaps a little excessively noble?
porolfr is introduced into the saga as "inn mesti kappsmaSr," a word which

10
Gehl, p. 75. I have adopted this point of view myself in The Icelandic Family Saga: An Analytic
Reading (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967), p. 32: "In short, there is no guiding
principle laid down by the author in order to give his material a specific import. He draws no general
conclusions and invites his reader to draw none. In this sense the saga is not interpretable. The critic,
whose congenital belief it lias been, from the Homeric commentators on, that a moral or a meaning is
inherent in literature, has nonetheless refrained from exercising his wiles on the saga." I must there-
fore ask for indulgence when I now exercise these wiles myself. Cf. Lars Lonnroth's excellent article
"Rhetorical Persuasion in the Sagas," in Scandinavian Studies, XMi (1970), 157-189.
11
Frye, p. 10.
12
Grffabi'di, i, 91.
13
Ibid.
578 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

at the positive end of the semantic spectrum means a firm man and at the
negative end a contentious man. The latter shade of character is inherited by
porolfr's nephew Egill, the protagonist in the remainder of the saga. He too
devotes his career to feuding with a Norwegian king, but there is an interesting
contrast between the two feuds. The eminently attractive hero J>6rolfr suc-
cumbs, while the eminently unattractive Egill, physically and otherwise porolf r's
antithesis, survives. But though he survives, he gains nothing in stature; he
remains a surly, aggressive, and acquisitive giant. His honor is not at stake,
nor does it profit from his feud.
Now, since the action in both generations involves a contest with the Nor-
wegian throne, it is not too much to suggest that this is the theme of the saga.
If the roles and personalities of the two heroes had been interchanged, if the
heroic porolfr had conquered and the glowering anti-hero Egill had succumbed,
we would have credited the author with the proper sense of values and a proper
sense of rewards, and we would have regarded the saga as a positive statement
about the advisability of such feuds and the vindication of honor against all
comers. But as things stand we can only judge that porolfr's honor is too de-
manding and does not avail against the king and that no honor accrues to Egill
from his challenge to the throne, in effect that a stubborn pursuit of honor is
either tragic or vain and inconclusive. We can see in the text only a negative
statement about this sort of contest and infer a preference for compromise.
Such a reading is of course particularly tempting because of Snorri's putative
authorship and the probability that Snorri would have urged moderate diplomacy
in dealing with Norway.
The saga in which the author's point of view is clearest and about which it is
consequently easiest to make a thematic statement is perhaps Hwnsa-poris
saga. The tragic protagonist, Blund-Ketill Geirsson, expropriates surplus hay
from a neighbor when he is refused sale in an emergency and is eventually killed
at the behest of the injured neighbor, Hcensa-porir. There is clearly a breach of
the law, but the point of the saga is that it is a technical breach, that Blund-
Ketill is a thoroughly honorable man, and that his enemies are in part malicious
and in part misguided. How does the saga define honor in the case of Blund-Ketill?
Certainly not as the stubborn self-vindication of which the treatises speak. On
the contrary, his honor is selfless andflexible.The seizure of hay is no act of self-
interest, but is undertaken on behalf of hard-pressed tenants. It is not carried
out self-righteously or with undue provocation; Blund-Ketill rehearses a long
list of generous offers which the villainous Hoensa-J>6rir rejects out of sheer ill
will. When legal action is brought against him, Blund-Ketill again makes every
possible effort to effect a conciliation and is again unsuccessful only because
he is confronted with malice. There is a clear opposition between honorable
and dishonorable behavior, in terms of which the former is defined as a firm but
moderate attitude and a willingness to go more than halfway in meeting even
an unreasonable opponent. Gehl wrote:
In der Hochschatzung des Stolzes und Machttriebes gibt es schlechthin keine Grenze. Mit
Demut kann sich keiner Achtung erringen. . . . Einen 'Enthusiasmus des Entsagens' gibt
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas 579
es hochstens in der Form, dass man aus Stolz auf irgendwelche Vorteile Verzicht leistet.14
Hwnsa-poris saga is the best demonstration to the contrary. Blund-Ketill is
willing to sacrifice his pride in the most humiliating way when dealing with the
upstart Hcensa-porir, but he emerges from the saga enjoying universal respect.
The lesson is that honor does not lie in self-exaltation and an unyielding pro-
tection of one's prestige, but in an equitable and just perspective.
Gimnlaugs saga is the best representative of the love saga, about which Gehl
says:
Auch die oft falschlich so genannten Liebesnovellen wie die Bjarna und die Gunnlaugs-
saga . . . sind zu allererst Tragodien der Ehrverletzung, so sehr etwa in der Gunnlaugssaga
Liebe, Eifersucht und Hass sich unentwirrbar verkniipfen — eines steht unverriickbar
fest: die Forderung der Ehre. Sie ist Schicksal und gibt dem Ganzen den wahrhaft tra-
gischen Charakter.15
It is certainly true that the motivations in Gunnlaugs saga are strangely inter-
twined and difficult to separate; it is therefore a little hard-handed to make
honor the prime mover and the controlling principle in the saga. The climactic
scene, in which the rivals Gunnlaugr and Hrafn kill one another, shows on
balance that the destiny behind the story is not honor but love. Hrafn, who is
severely wounded, asks Gunnlaugr for water and promises not to betray him,
but when Gunnlaugr approaches in good faith, Hrafn breaks his promise and
inflicts a headwound which proves fatal. This is the most dishonorable episode in
saga literature.16 The point is that Hrafn's love for Helga is so strong that it
costs him his honor. To Gunnlaugr's reproach for his treachery he can only
reply:
Satt er bat, . . . en bat gekk iner til }>ess, at ek ami ber
eigi faSmlagsins Helgu imiar fQgru. (IF III, 102)
That is true, . . . and I did it because I begrudge you
the embrace of Helga the Fair.17
The larger point for us must be that honor, even in the otherwise very honorable
Hrafn, is not the highest and most coercive standard. I t is a fragile quality
which shatters on the more unyielding demands of Eros. I t may be that this is a
post-classical and decadent moral (though the heroic legend of Sigurd did not
disdain love as a tragic motivation), but it will in any case not do to interpret
Gunnlaugs saga as yet another demonstration of the binding force of honor,
before which all else crumbles.
" Gehl, p. 21.
15
Ibid., 73-74.
16
Gunnlaugr's father says ag much: "Hverju villtu boeta mer son minn . . . er Hrafn, sonr f;inn,
sveik hann I tryggSum?" IF III, 105. This is reminiscent of Sigurd's death, the most dishonorable
episode in heroic poetry: "Enn J)at segia allir einnig, at J?eir svicu hann I trygS oc vogo at hanom
liggianda oc obunom." From "Fra DauSa SigurSar," Edda: Die Lieder des Codex Regius nebst ver-
wandten Denkmalern, 3. umgearbeitete Auflage, ed. Hans Kuhn (Heidelberg, 1962), p. 201.
17
This is reminiscent of Brynhildr's reply to GuSrun in Vqlsunga sa0a:"])essskaltugjalda,erf>uatt
SigurS, ok ek ann J>er eigi hans at njota ne gullsins mikla." Fornaldar Sogur Nordurlanda, ed. GuSni
Jonsson (n.p., 1954), i, 180. The citations from the family sagas refer to the texts in fslenzk Fornrit,
vols. II-XII (Reykjavik, 1033-56).
580 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

Gehl's conception of the ideal chieftain shows a similar bias:

Der hQJdingi und mikilmmni ist fast mit Notwendigkeit zugleich ojafnadarmadr, d.b. er
verfahrt selbstherrlich und mit 'unbilliger' Harte gegen jeden, der seinem Herrschaftsan-
spruch im Wege steht. Es haftet kein sittlicher Vorwurf an diesem ojafnadr . . . ; denn er
steht innerhalb des forn si(5r in keinem fiihlbaren Gegensatz zu dem herrschenden Ehrbe-
griff.18

To this is added a footnote:

Man vgl. z.B. die Zeichnung des Styr, des typischen ojafnafiarmadr, im Styrsb. der Hei'8.
und in der Eyrb. Es fehlt jede abfallige Nuance (wie sie z.B. immer in dem BegrifY odreng-
skapr vorhanden ist).
I t is difficult not to take exception to this neutral judgment of the ojafnadarma'dr.
Not only should it be clear to any reader of Heidarviya saga that Styrr is easily
the least attractive character in the story, but it should also be clear that the
frequently recurring figure of the ojafna'darma'Sr is always harshly judged in the
sagas. To document this at length would involve overkill; it is enough that
Ileicjarviga saga explicitly condemns the ojafnadarmadr. A few years after Styrr
has committed his last killing against an outnumbered older man (porhalli), a
certain porleikr, who has raised the deceased man's son Gestr, appeals to Styrr
for some token compensation for the boy:
pat viroisk mqnnum, bu hafir fyrir litlar sakar
vegit porhalla; . . . (IF III, 231)
People think that you killed porhalli for little
cause; . . .
Iii other words, this unjust slaying by Styrr is not given the benefit of neutrality.
It is not merely a question of an "abfallige Nuance" but an outright condemna-
tion by public opinion ("pat virSisk mgnnum. . . "). When Styrr then sarcas-
tically offers Gestr a mangy lamb as indemnity, porleikr replies:
petta er hvartki goSmarmliga ne hofSingliga majlt,
ok hefSa ek annarra orSa vsent af ber; . . . (IF III, 231)
This is spoken neither like a gentleman nor like
a chieftain, and I expected different words from
you; . . .
This clearly conflicts with the view that a hqfdingi is almost necessarily an
ojafna'darma'dr; because Styrr acts the part of an inequitable man, he fails to
act the part of a chieftain. The incompatibility of Sjafna'fir and hof'fiingskapr
could not be more apparent.
No real conclusions can be based on the story of Styrr in Hei'darviga saga
because we have only Jon Olafsson's late transcription from memory. On the
other hand, it is clear that Jon Olafsson derived no very favorable picture of
Styrr from what he remembered. What we do retain a favorable impression
of is BarSi's behavior during the feud which grows out of Styrr's action. Bar'Si
18
Gehl, p. 18. Gehl's distinction between ojafnaSr (neutral) and ddrengskapr (negative) is neatly
refuted by a passage in Hdvardar saga, IF, VI, 300: "Jjotti Qllum mgnnum porbJQrn enn nu hafa
au5syndan 6jafna'5 sinn ok fullkominn odrengskap."
 Displacement of the Heroic, Ideal in the Family Sagas 581

turns out to be hardly less formidable a warrior than Styrr, but he shares no
characteristics of the ojafna'darmadr. He is cautious, circumspect, open to
counsel, and conscious of public opinion. Obliged to seek redress for a slain man,
he first solicits the advice of his mentor porarinn. He is told to appeal for com-
pensation patiently at the Thing for two summers; he does so and is rewarded
with public approbation:
. . . ; en allr bingheimrinn lofa'Si, hversu spakliga var at malinu farit. (IF III, 256)
. . . ; and everyone at the Thing praised the restraint with which he conducted the
case.
The third summer Bar'o'i is advised to address his appeal to a certain Gisli,
who is known to be hotheaded. Predictably enough he is insulted, in other words
he has deliberately sacrificed his "honor" in order to maneuver his opponent into
the position of an ojafnadarmadr, which however promptly redounds to his
credit:
Gera menn nu mikinn rom at mali BarSa, ok bykkir bungliga svarat, me<5 sliku spaklseti,
sem bessa er beizk. (IF III, 259)
BarSi's speech was greeted with great applause and it seemed to people that he got a
hard answer considering the restraint with which he made his request.
Barb'i's strategy opens the way for him to take a justified vengeance. It seems
clear then that in Jon Olafsson's memory of Hei'darviga saga aggressive behavior
met with public disapproval while restraint and moderation met with public
sanction. One can therefore hardly subscribe to Gehl's view: "Der ojafna'damadr
Styr hat denselben Anteil des Erzahlers wie Bar'Si und J>6rarin."19
BarSi is primarily a methodical and sagacious man and only incidentally a
good warrior. But these qualities have somehow failed to interest the students
of Norse values, who tend to look askance at characters who do not conform
to the swashbuckling ideal. Gr0nbech could only bring himself to frame a nega-
tive concession: "Cleverness and diplomacy were not forbidden qualities in the
old morality."20 But it is not at all clear to me that diplomacy was a second class
quality in the eyes of the thirteenth-century Icelander. Bar'Si is a case in point.
But the most illustrious and successful diplomat in the sagas is Snorri goSi, the
protagonist of Eyrbyggja saga. Snorri is no gallant viking nor a memorable hero
but a skilled tactician and an artist in survival. He is not popular, but he is
universally respected as a great chieftain. His greatness rests on keen judgment
and a willingness to compromise, not on a jealous disputing of honor. Eyrbyggja
saga depicts his career as a kind of tightrope, on which he balances with mastery
but not without some bad moments. He guards his reputation, but his assertive-
ness never goes beyond what his position can tolerate. The modern reader may
find Snorri pussy-footing and devious compared to more flamboyant saga heroes,
but his contemporaries seem to have valued his sense of diplomacy, as is clear
from the fact that he is the most frequent peacemaker and arbiter of disputes in
the sagas. I fail to find any evidence that the Odyssean Snorri was less highly
13
Gehl, p. 9(i.
20
Gr^nbech, I, 11.
582 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

regarded than his more Achillean compatriots, rather the contrary. The only
characteristic mentioned in Eyrbyggja sagas description, in addition to personal
appearance, wisdom, and the fact that Snorri was good to his friends and hard on
his enemies, is gentleness:
. . . harm var hogveerr hversdagliga . . . (IF IV, 26)
. . . he was normally mild-mannered . . .
I believe that anyone wishing to prove that the mild-mannered man is more
highly esteemed in the sagas than the ojafnadarmadr would have little difficulty.
It is, for example, interesting that of all the chieftains provoked by SkarpheSinn
in Njdls saga, Snorri comes off best. In response to SkarpheSinn's taunting sugges-
tion that he should avenge his father Snorri replies evenly:
Margir hafa £>at meelt aSr ok mun ek ekki viS
sliku reiSask. (IF XII, 300)
People have said that before and I am not going
to be angered by such things.
This is a man who is above petty bickering about personal honor.
Alongside Heidarviga saga Gehl places Hdvarfiar saga Isfir'Sings as the purest
representative of the old feeling for honor: "Die HavarSarsaga ist — trotz der
Jugend der iiberlieferten Fassung — fur das Ehrgefiihl dieser alteren Gruppe das
eindrucksvollste Beispiel."21 This judgment is doubtless based on the readiness
and efficiency with which Havartir is able, finally, to avenge the death of his son
Olafr. My impression differs in that I am not able to take the portrayal of honor
quite seriously. This saga has none of the earmarks of a classical work but is
characteristic of a late stage given to hyperbolic imitation. The old fellow's
mission of vengeance partakes a little too much of the musical comedy: the
exaggerated sorrow which sends him to bed, the perennial admonishings of his
wife (what better lampoon of the old hvgt?), his submissive trips to the Thing in
search of redress, his wife's metaphorical recruitment of allies, and HavarSr's
miraculous recovery of youth and spirits when the redemption of honor is at
hand. One may choose to put a parodistic or an epigonous construction on these
well-worn conventions, but it is difficult to see in Havartir a serious embodiment
of a venerable ideal.
On the contrary, the figure who best conforms to some sort of ethical ideal
in the saga is not HavarSr but his son Olafr. Not that Olafr fails to satisfy a
traditional code of honor; when he is attacked without cause by the typical
ojafna^armadr porbjgrn, he gives every satisfaction and dies defending himself
manfully. But the tragedy of Olafr's death lies not in the demise of a man of un-
compromising honor but in the fall of a good man. He recommends himself to
the reader by collecting lost sheep and returning them to their owners, by dis-
regarding the ingratitude with which the gesture is received in porbjojn's house-
hold (there is no stuffy indulgence of personal honor), and by disposing of a
sorcerer's revenant which is preying on the district. Olafr is a model member of the
community — civic-minded, conciliatory, and guileless. Nevertheless he is killed.
21
Gehl, p. 07.
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas 583

What moves the author of this story is not the issue of personal honor but the
tragedy of incommensurate rewards and the consoling certainty that retribution
follows injustice.
Hdvarfiar saga Isfirdings may give a slightly comic version of personal honor,
but a really negative statement is reserved for Valla-Ljots saga (if we overlook
the desecration of traditional values in Bandamanna saga). In brief, the saga
tells us the story of Halli SigurSsson, an aggressive and ambitious man who
leaves his district in mid-life in order to enhance his status:
. . . eigi ma ek her mestr matSr vera varra frsenda, metSan ver erum her allir, en J>ar m&
ek mestr maor heita. (IF IX, 239)
. . . here I cannot be the most prominent man in the family, as long as we are all here,
but there I can be regarded as the most prominent man.
Halli promptly antagonizes the chieftain of his new district, Valla-Ljotr, who
responds at first with admirable restraint, but when Halli adds to his hostile acts
certain invidious comments, Valla-Ljotr takes revenge and kills him. The re-
mainder of the saga is devoted to the settlement of the incident, which is eventu-
ally effected by the chieftains Valla-Ljotr and GuSmundr inn riki. Both men
exercise the utmost moderation and both emerge, as the saga tells us explicitly,
with their honor intact. The message is clear: the saga rejects the vain and self-
seeking quest of personal honor and vindicates conciliation.22
Valla-Ljdts saga provides a particularly instructive demonstration of the dis-
crepancy between integral reading and episodic reading, since by virtue of
episodic reading Gehl was able to use even this text in his argument for the
positive force of honor. He suggested that the reader's sympathy is on Halli's
side in the opening episode when Halli kills his mother's suitor, who, he feels, is
of inferior birth.23 Only when this episode is isolated from the gist of the whole
saga can it be read in a positive sense. Seen in context Halli's slaying is the first
evidence of his false sense of honor, which the saga as a whole so plainly con-
demns.
If Valla-Ljots saga contains the clearest negative ethic in the sagas, Reyhdcela
saga boasts the clearest positive ethic; one saga makes recommendations about
how a man should not behave, the other makes recommendations about how he
should behave.
The first section of Reykdwla saga describes a long and monotonously con-
structed feud between Vemundr kggurr and Steingrimr Qrnolfsson. Eight times
the two men clash, and seven times the chieftain Askell, sometimes with the aid
of Eyjolfr ValgerSarson, effects a settlement (only after the fourth incident is he
unsuccessful). Askell's imperturbable patience in arbitrating these endless dis-
putes makes him one of the most impressive characters in the sagas. Gehl dis-
n
This is the conclusion reached in an article by Marlene Ciklamini: "What distinguishes VaUa-
Lj6ts saga is not only its didactic aim, but also the form in which the transmuted concept of honor is
sustained. Throughout the saga, men of good will are reluctant to use force in countering defiance and
aggressive acts and disavow or question the social sanction of blood revenge." "The Concept of Honor
in Valla-Ljots Saga," JEOP, LXV (1966), 303.
23
Gehl, pp. 14-15.
 584 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

missed him as "den Typus des christlichen Hauptlings," 24 but Gr0nbech was more
subtle:
Perhaps Askell, the just, peace-making cliieftain from Reykjadalr, is a little too modern to
fit properly into Egill's company; but his story, as it is told in Reykda'la saga, gives us in
any case a vivid picture of the principles of conciliation in the old morality.-0

Askell is no Christian encrustation, but the soul of the story. Neither Veuiundr,
who is a combination of the ojafna'darma'dr (IF X, 160) and the rascal, nor
Steingrimr, though an appealing figure, is the real hero. Drengskapr, Gehl's term
for a sophisticated sense of honor, is the property of Askell:
Ok jafnan syndi Askell bat, at hann var fam monnum likr sakar rettdcemis, er hann
haf Si manna i millum, ok drengskapar viS hvern mann. (IF X, 171)
And Askell always showed that he had few equals iu just dealing with men and the
generosity of spirit which he exercised toward all.
When Askell is killed, it happens characteristically as he returns from yet
another mission of arbitration, and even on the threshold of death he is able to
make a final grand gesture of conciliation by concealing the fatal wound he has
received long enough to avert a new outbreak of hostilities (like Ingimundr in
Vatnsdcela saga and Kotiran in Ljosvetninga saga). After his death, the author of
the saga leaves him a fitting memorial, demonstrating once more that Askell is
the real hero and moral focus of the story:
Nu andask Askell got)i. Ok botti mgnnum bat mikill mannska'Si, bvi at hann hafSi
verit mikill liQi'Singi ok vinsaell. . . . pott Askell vseri morgum mgnnum meir harmdauoi
en Steingrimr, ba var bo hvarrtveggi mikill hgf"5ingi. (IF X, 202)
Now Askell the chieftain died. And many people thought it was a great loss because he
had been a great and popular chieftain. . . . Although many people thought Askell a
more grievous loss than Steingrimr, still both were great chieftains.
The ethical ideal in Reykda'la saga is clear. We cannot deduce from it that:
"Der hqfdingi und mikilmenni ist fast mit Notwendigkeit zugleich 6jafna?)ar-
ma'dr,... " 26 On the contrary, the ideal chieftain is a tireless conciliator with an un-
common sense of justice and restraint and a willingness to efface himself in the
interests of peace.
Hrafnkels saga freysgoda combines the ethical statements made by Valla-Ljots
saga and Reykdcela saga; it illustrates on the basis of Hrafnkell's career both how
a chieftain should act and how he should not act. It is the only saga which is so
openly moralistic that it enacts an ethical program by telling a story of pride,
punishment, and rehabilitation. Hrafnkell vows to kill anyone who rides his
horse Freyfaxi and when, partly by force of circumstances and without malice,
a certain Einarr transgresses, Hrafnkell makes good his vow to the letter.
Hrafnkell is a powerful man and Einarr is without influential relatives so that
the prospects for revenge are dim. But almost miraculously Einarr is avenged
and Hrafnkell is humiliated, deposed, and exiled from the district. The motif of
24
Ibid., 107.
26
Gr0nbech,i,41.
a
Gelil, p. 18.
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas 585

improbable revenge, effected by children or old men, is familiar from Heidarviga

saga and Hdvarfiar saga, where it has providential overtones and suggests that
an abuse of power will be punished no matter what the odds are. But Hrafnkell
is not killed outright, as is usually the case; he is humbled so that he can learn.
Prior to his fall he is a caricature of a chieftain:
VitS betta var lengt nafn hans ok kallaSr FreysgcSi, ok var 6jafna<5arma3r mikill, en
menntr vel. Hann ^r^ngtu undir sik Jokulsdalsmgnnum til bingmanna hans, var linr ok
bli'Sr viS sina menn, en stri'Sr ok stirtSlyndr viS Jgkulsdalsmenn, ok fengu af honum
engan jafna'5. Hrafnkell st6(5 mjok i einvigjum ok boetti engan maim fe, bvi at engi fekk
af honum neinar boetr, hvat sem hann gerSi. (IF XI, 99)
Because of this [his attachment to the god Freyr and his desire to be a chieftain] his
name was lengthened and he was called Freyr's chieftain, and he was a very unjust man,
though a man of good parts. He forced the men of Jokulsdale to become his Thingmen,
he was mild and kindly to his own men, but hard and unyielding to the men of Jokulsdale,
and they received no justice from him. Hrafnkell was often involved in single combats
and paid no indemnity for anyone, so that no one received any compensation no matter
what he did.
But his fall from power makes a drastic change in Hrafnkell's life:
A betta logtm menn mikla umrce'Hu, hversu hans ofsi haf(5i ni'Sr fallit, ok minnisk nu
margr a fornan or'SskviS, at skQmm er ohofs eevi. (IF XI, 122)
There was much talk about how his pride had suffered a fall and many people recalled
the old proverb that excess is shortlived.
Hrafnkell takes the lesson to heart and mends his ways:
Var nil skipan a komin a kind hans.27 MatSrinn var miklu vinsaelli en aSr. Haf'Si hann ina
somu skapsmuni urn gagnsem'5 ok risnu, en miklu var maSrinn nti vinsselli ok gsefari ok
hoegri en fyrr at oOu. (IF XI, 125)
Now there was a change in his disposition. The man was much more popular than before.
He had the same instincts of gain and outlay, but he was much more popular and quieter
and more easy-going than before in all things.
We need not look far for the moral in this story; it is contained in the old proverb
"sko.mm er ohofs revi."
Finally, a word about Njdls saga. This is a saga which, for obvious reasons, has
provided almost no foothold for elaborations on honor, at least honor in the tra-
ditional sense of magnified personal reputation. It is not a story of prowess or
heroism, but a story of frustrated good will, a story of noble personalities who
succumb to less noble rivals and the pressures of society.
There are four parts to the saga: the story of Ilriitr Herjolfsson, the feud be-
tween Gunnarr's wife HallgerSr and Njall's wife Bergbora, then the main action
comprising the story of Gunnarr's death and the story of Njall's burning. None
of these parts is about the quest for honor; they are about determined but ulti-
mately futile efforts to maintain an equilibrium in the face of malice and ill will.
The prefatory matter concerning Hriitr characterizes a man distinguished in
every way, who, through no fault of his own, is cursed with a bad marriage, com-
27
The reading lund is an emendation for land and has been disputed, but it seems to me to make
better sense. See Pierre llalleux, "Hrafnkel's Character Reinterpreted," Scandinavian Studies, xxxvm
(1966), 43.
586 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

promised by a divorce, and humiliated when his wife's dowry is extracted at

sword's point by Gunnarr. Yet when two children act out the details of Hrutr's
private misfortune in public and his brother strikes one of them in anger, Hriitr
responds by compensating the injured child with a gold ring. Gehl properly cited
this anecdote as a model of drengskapr (pp. 110-111) and Hrutr's honor does not
suffer from his complaisant behavior:
Af Jjessu fekk Hrutr gott orS. (fF XII, 29)
Hrutr was applauded for this.
Again, when he is forced to back down from a duel with Gunnarr, he harbors no
grudge and is able to maintain friendly relations with Gunnarr.
Ho.skuldr ok Hrutr toku vel viS Gunnari; hann settisk niSr i meSal J?eira, ok fannsk ))at
ekki i tali Jjeira, at J>ar hefSi ngkkur misj>ykkja i meSal verit. (IF XII, 86)
Hgskuldr and Hrutr welcomed Gunnarr; he sat down between them and nothing in
their speech indicated that there had ever been a disagreement between them.
The gist of this story seems to be that a man can be equal to his misfortune and
survive it without damage to his reputation if he recognizes the limits of his situ-
ation and exercises the necessary restraint.
The second part of the saga recounts the feud between HallgerSr and Bergjjora,
which is almost caricatural in the willfulness of its perpetrators and the sym-
metry of its design. The author apparently intends to set off the preeminent
patience of Gunnarr and Njall, who settle the dispute with courtesy and tact as
often as it is renewed, despite the flagrant aggressiveness of their wives, especi-
ally HallgerSr. As so often in the sagas, this preface has a nice pertinence to the
plot. A feud which is so formalized as to be abstract precedes the more realistic
feuds which bedevil the careers of Gunnarr and Njall. Furthermore, this pro-
leptic feud demonstrates how two parties motivated by good will and patience
can, despite all provocations, settle a feud no matter how acrimoniously it is
prosecuted. The subsequent events are doubly tragic when they reveal that even
these two ideally constituted personalities cannot prevail against the feud men-
tality and eventually succumb, each in his own way.
They succumb differently, Gunnarr resisting in the old style and Njall philo-
sophically. Gunnarrr succumbs because, against Njall's advice, he fails to ob-
serve the terms of what should have been the final settlement of his feud. He has
been sentenced to a three-year exile, but he reneges at the last moment when he
glances back and remarks on the appearance of his fields. It has been felt that he
simply could not bring himself to leave his home (though he had spent two j^ears
abroad before), but it is just as likely that his remark is one of the traditional and
inapposite excuses used by heroes to mask their will. Gehl wrote: "Mit diesem
Entschluss, der sein Schicksal zur Erfiillung bringt, handelt Gunnarr durchaus
ehrenhaft, denn er wahlt den Weg der grosseren Gefahr."28 I am not certain
whether this is the sense of the passage and whether Gunnarr's decision is not
rather an inadequacy in his character and, in the final analysis, a failure to satisfy
the last demands on his patience and good will. This is suggested by Kolskeggr's
28
Gehl, p. 41.
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas 587

reaction to Gunnarr's proposal that he too remain in Iceland:

. . . ; hvarki skal ek a bessu niSask ok engu gSru, bvi er mer er til truat; ok mun sja
einn hlutr sva vera, at skilja mun met) okkr, . . . {IF XII, 183)
I will not dishonor myself in this matter or any other matter in which my good faith is
counted on; and this thing alone will lead to our separation, . . .
Kolskeggr, at any rate, does not think that his brother is acting "durchaus ehren-
haft" and Kolskeggr is our only key to the author's opinion. Gunnarr has been
struggling long and hard against the maelstrom of the feud imposed on him by
his wife, but at the last moment he weakens and is dragged down. He has not
gained personal honor but has slipped back into a personal morality.
The doubt surrounding Gunnarr's fate and the possibility that he is at least
partially culpable (though this is a strong word for inadequacy under strain)
provides the saga with a development in the action and a moral elaboration from
the first part to the second. In the preface Gunnarr and Njall are equally sure-
footed in dealing with the feud between their wives, in the next feud Gunnarr
finally stumbles (literally and figuratively) and succumbs, but in the third feud
Njall never stumbles and still falls. He becomes a victim of a system which over-
powers the individual despite an exemplary display of personal good will. There
can be no question of a critique of the individual here, but at most of a critique
of feud society, which swallows up its best members in the pursuit of miscon-
strued honor.
The feud is ultimately settled after a massive battle at the Allthing. The settle-
ment is initiated by Hallr af Sic5u and it is made possible characteristically not
by an insistence on honor but by a sacrifice of honor. Hallr makes a brilliant
offer of renunciation:
"Allir menn vitu, hvern harm ek hefi fingit, at Ljotr, son minn, er latinn. Munu J>at
margir aetla, at hann muni dyrstr gorr af beim monnum, er her hafa latizk. En ek vil
vinna bat til sastta at leggja son minn ogildan ok ganga bo til at veita beim bse'Si trygg-
Sir ok gri'S, er minir motsto'Sumenn em. BiS ek bik, Snorri goSi, ok atSra ina beztu
menn, at ber komib bvi til lei&'ar, at saettir ver<5i met) oss." SiSan settisk hann niSr, ok
varS romr mikill ok goSr gorr at mali hans, ok lofuSu allir mjok hans goSgirnd. {IF
XII, 411-412)
"Everyone knows what grief I have suffered in the loss of my son Ljotr. Many may feel
that he will come dearest of all those who died here. But for the sake of a settlement I
will offer to leave my son uncompensated and still agree to both a truce and guarantees
with those who are my opponents. I ask you, Snorri goSi, and the other most prominent
men, to bring about a settlement between us." Then he sat down and his speech was
greeted with great and favorable applause and all praised his good will mightily.
Gehl again dismissed this passage as an intrusion of Christian humilitas and
criticized Gr0nbech for his impressionability and his failure to see the Christian
influence.29 But Gr0nbech saw more clearly. Hallr makes the gesture not out of
humility but out of a sense of emergency and a recognition that his action must
be drastic enough to meet the crisis. There is no reversal of values and no spe-
cifically Christian intrusion but the same conciliatoriness for which Hrutr,
Gunnarr, and Njall stood and which is a prominent ideal in the other sagas.
29
Ibid., 145.
588 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

Hallr's offer is an example of heightened moderation which shows us what an

extraordinary effort of good will may on occasion be necessary to redeem peace
and curtail the menace of an expanding feud.
It remains to generalize, on the basis of these ten sagas, about the concept of
honor which Gehl and others have placed so prominently in the foreground of
their ethical interpretations. Egils saga makes a statement about the unpro-
ductiveness of self-aggrandizement, Hcensa-poris saga recommends conciliation
even at the cost of personal honor, Gunnlaugs saga suggests the frailty of honor,
Heifiarviga saga rejects personal arbitrariness and recommends a respect for
public opinion, Eyrbyggja saga celebrates the art of diplomacy, Hdvar'dar saga
praises generosity and forebearance, Valla-Ljots saga condemns the pursuit of
personal honor and counsels compromise, Reykdwla saga idealizes the peace-
maker, Hrafnkels saga chastises the overbearing chieftain, and Njdls saga con-
demns the whole pattern of feuding. Gehl stated: "Was weithin zu fehlen scheint,
ist ein negatives Ideal, entsprechend der griechischen aixuppoavvr], der mittel-
hochdeutschen maze." 30 My reading is rather different. What gives a consistency
to the ethical temper of these sagas is precisely a sense of proportion and moder-
ation. They are written against excess: excessive self-seeking (Egils saga), ex-
cessive passion (Gunnlaugs saga), excessive ambition (Valla-Ljots saga), exces-
sive arbitrariness (Hdvar'dar saga, Hrafnkels saga), or they are written in praise
of moderation (Heidarviga saga, Eyrbyggja saga) and forebearance (Hcensa-
poris saga, Reykdcela saga, Njdls saga). In short, I can find no better key to the
spirit of these sagas than the concept of sophrosyne. Most other sagas, it seems
to me, conform to the same ideal (Fostbrwdra saga, Glums saga, Vdpnfir'dinga
saga, Droplaugarsona saga, Gisla saga, porsteins pdttr stangarJiQggs), while perhaps
only Laxdcela saga resuscitates and idealizes the old heroic concept of honor.
In dealing with classical literature we can test our feeling about the moral
temper of literary works against the theoretical statements of moral treatises. In
Iceland the closest we can come to a moral treatise is the Eddie poem Hdvamdl
and it may be worth while to compare the sense of this poem with the sense of the
sagas.
The ethical precepts recommended by Hdvamdl have generally been regarded
as unpleasant. Van den Toorn's book on saga ethics distinguishes between
"Hdvamdl ethics" and "heroic ethics" and projects an unexalted picture of the
former:
The ethics displayed are materialistic and utilitarian, and most can be reduced to one
central conception: self-interest. . . . Havamal ethics are essentially rustic; the moderation
propagated is a mediocrity and the caution easily changes into suspiciousness.31
30
Ibid., 139. The history of sophrosyne can now be followed in the fascinating account by Helen
North, Sophrosyne: Self-Knowledge and Self-Restraint in Greek Literature (Ithaca: Cornell University
Press, 1966). It strikes me that there is a real analogy between the development from heroic megalo-
psychos in Homer to the civic virtue of sophrosyne in later Greece on the one hand and the develop-
ment from warrior's honor in Germanic heroic poetry to the social ideal of moderation in the sagas on
the other hand.
31
M. C. van den Toorn, Ethics and Moral in Icelandic Saga Literature (Assen, 1955), p. 29. On van
den Toorn's book hi general see Bjarni GuSnason, "pankar um siSfraeSi Islendingasagna," Sklrnir,
cxxxix (1965), 65-82.
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas .589

I am not certain that the central concept is really self-interest in any contempt-
ible sense and that the moderation propounded is really a mediocrity.
The gnomic section of Hdvamdl comprises the first ninety stanzas and in addi-
tion "Loddfafnismal" (stanzas 111-137). The first part might be broken down as
follows (bearing in mind that the headings are very approximate and that there
are stanzas in each group which do not fit particularly well) :
1 Entrance
, ,,. T , . 2-4 Behavior befitting a host
1-10 introduction _„-,-,, . , „ .
5-7 Behavior befitting a guest
8-10 Admonition to listen and learn
11-21 Moderation in food and drink
22-31 Varieties of foolishness
32—52 Social intercourse
53-73 Practical precepts
74-79 Vanity
80-90 Distrust
The framework evoked for the poem by the introduction is a visit and the first
fifty stanzas or so revolve loosely around this situation and the social amenities
pertaining to it: proper eating and drinking habits, proper conversational habits,
good manners, and the proper conduct of friendship. Then the fiction tends to
dissolve and the precepts become more and more general.
What is really the burden of "Hdvamdl ethics"? The sense of the first section
on food and drink is clearly moderation. Stanza 11 warns against an "ofdrykkja
ols" ("excess of ale") and stanza 19 elaborates the thought as follows (the quota-
tions are from Kuhn's edition):
Haldit ma'Sr a keri, drecci ]>6 at hofi miQ(5,
mseli bari't e'fia begi;
A man should not hold fast to his tankard, but
should drink mead with moderation: he should
speak to the point or be silent.

Van den Toorn plays down the level of the intention here: "A note of warning is
sounded against the possible consequences of drinking ale, but the temperance
propagated is a precautionary measure against being at a disadvantage in a
quarrel . . . ."32 This is not what the stanza really says. Drinking is discouraged
because it affects the mind:
J)viat fitra veit, er fleira drecer,
sins til ge'b's gumi. (stanza 12)
The more he drinks, the less a man is in
possession of his wits.
Overeating is discouraged for more or less the same reason; it makes a man foolish
(stanza 20) or bestial (stanza 21).
32
Van den Toorn, p. 31.
590 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

The next section (22-31) deals specifically with foolishness. A foolish man
mocks others while unaware of his own weaknesses (22), he wastes himself on
worry (23), he is too credulous (24-25), he is too garrulous (27-29), or he is too
unguarded (30-31). Again, all these precepts deal with excess and illustrate on
a much less abstract and more practical level the sort of negative ideal urged by
the sagas. It is not so much a question of self-interest as of self-contained be-
havior.
The section on social intercourse (32-52) is not pertinent to an ethical outlook
since it has more to do with details of etiquette (32, 33, 35), the cultivation of
friends (34, 41-44, 50, 52) and precautions against enemies (38, 39, 45, 46, 51),
the practice of generosity (39, 40, 48, 49), and the value of home (36, 37) and
human society (47). What this section does share with the sagas is an awareness
of the community in which the individual lives.
The following group of stanzas (53-73) contains a variety of practical precepts
which are for the most part ethically oriented. There are first of all the curious
stanzas recommending a moderate intelligence (54-56):
MeSalsnotr scyli manna hverr,
asva til snotr se;
J)eim er fyrSa fegrst at lifa,
er vel mart vito. (stanza 54)
Every man should have a middling mind and never be
too wise; life is fairest for those men who know
just enough.

These sentiments have a strange ring for the modern student, who would prob-
ably not be reading them if he had the recommended sense of intellectual moder-
ation. They come closest to justifying van den Toorn's verdict of mediocrit,
though stanza 56 suggests that what is really meant is that a man will live more
contentedly if he is not so clear-sighted as to know his own fate, an unexception-
able maxim. In any case, what is being urged is another form of moderation.
Aside from the homey moral of 58-59 ("The early bird gets the worm.") many
of the following stanzas are characterized by a happy medium: a man can main-
tain dignity though he has modest means (61), one should not be gregarious at
the expense of firm alliances (62), and one should be well-informed but discreet
(63, 65, 73). Stanza 64 contains in capsule form the moral of such sagas as
Hdvar'Sar saga and Hrafnkels saga and might serve as an epigraph for Eyrbyggja
saga:
Riki sitt scyli raSsnotra hverr
i hofi hafa;
J>a harm bat finnr, er met) frcecnom k0mr,
at engi er einna hvatastr.
Every wise man should exercise his power with moderation;
he will find, when he comes together with
brave men, that none is the bravest of all.

This is contrary to top-dog heroic morality and embodies the ideal of conciliation
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas 591

which is at the heart of the sagas. The final stanzas of the section (69-72) state
that a man can find reason to be contented though he is ill, poor, handicapped, or
blessed only with posthumous progeny. Here too life is seen as a system of counter-
balancing factors. What informs these stanzas, and the sagas, is not a standard
which imposes an autocratic sense of values on the individual, but a flexible
attitude and a spirit of adjustment.
There follows a group of six stanzas (74-79) including the two famous and
repeatedly quoted stanzas (76-77) which are taken to document the supremacy
of honor in the Germanic and Icelandic scale of values.
Deyr fe deyia froendr,
deyr sialfr it sama;
enn orSztirr deyr aldregi,
hveim er ser goSan getr. (stanza 76)
Wealth perishes, family preishes, a man perishes
likewise; but reputation never perishes for a
man who acquires a good one.
Stanza 77 is in the same vein. These gnomes are often taken together with the
following passages from Beowulf and the Heliand to represent the quintessence of
Germanic morality:
Ure seghwyle sceal ende gebidan
worolde lifes; wyrce se be mote
domes ser dea]?e; baet bi'5 drihtguman
unlifgendum fefter selest. (1386-89)
Each of us will come to the end of this life
On earth; he who can earn it should fight
For the glory of his name; fame after death
Is the noblest of goals.
(trans. Burton Raffel)
Duan us alia so,
folgon im te thero ferdi: ni la tan use fera uuiS thiu
uuihtes uuirSig, ncba uui an them uuerode mid im,
doian mid uson drohtine. Than lebot thoh duom after,
guod word for gumon. (3998-4002)
Let us all follow him on this journey: our lives
lose nothing of value in this, but in his following,
together with him, we die with our lord. Then our
glory lives after us, the good reputation of men.
The same view is then generally extended to cover the sagas: "The heroes of the
sagas have the dictum of Hdvamdl about the 'judgment of a dead man' engraved
in their consciousness."33
In fact, the Hdvamdl stanzas tell us less about Germanic morality than about
our own susceptibility to monumental phrases out of context. If we read the
stanzas with the group in which they occur, they appear in a different light. It
turns out that the group is about uncertainty, vanity, and transitoriness. Stanza
» Hallberg, p. 99.
592 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas

74 tells us that we can be glad if we are sure of a meal and the uncertainty of
things is rendered with a weather image: "Fickle is an autumn night; there are
many kinds of weather in a week and more in a month." Stanza 75 tells us that a
man should not be reproached for a lack of wealth. Stanza 78 tells us that wealth
is impermanent: "Wealth is like the twinkle of any eye; it is the ficklest of
friends." And stanza 79 warns us against counting either on wealth or on a
woman's favor. What do stanzas 76 and 77 mean in this context? Simply that
wealth is fickle. They mean, oddly enough, the same as Proverbs 22,1: "A good
name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than
silver and gold." — a text which is not usually taken to illustrate the heroic
mentality. The emphasis is on the first part of these stanzas, concerning the
vanity of wealth, and not on the acquisition of honor. Reputation is a kind of
consolation prize in line with stanzas 69-72, which extend various comforts to
the variously handicapped. When stanza 71 tells us:
Haltr ri(5r hrossi, hJQr'5 rekr handarvanr,
daufr vegr ok dugir.
we are to translate:
A lame man can still ride a horse,
a one-armed man can still drive a herd,
a deaf man can stillfightand be valorous.

Likewise a dead man can still take some comfort in a good reputation. But
neither lameness, nor paraplegia, nor deafness, nor death have anything positive
to recommend them; the gnomes simply point out that there are always balancing
factors.
The last section of ten stanzas (80-90) attaches roughly to the section on vanity
since it suggests specific ways of avoiding a sense of false security: one should
distrust the future, women, swords, girls, ice, beer, weather, bows, fire, animals,
trees, waves, a boiling kettle, spears, a king's child, slaves, corpses, an early-sown
field, a son, the murderer of one's father, a half-burnt house, and a fast horse.
This amounts to a sample itemizing of the negative ideal.
What emerges from this collection of gnomic verse is not a formulation of self-
interest. It seems to me rather that Havamdl propounds the values of the middle
way and social accommodation and it seems to me further that this is very close to
the spirit which moves the authors of the sagas. "Riki sitt / scyli raSsnotra hverr /
i hofi hafa." and "Skgmm er ohofs sevi." are interchangeable maxims. The out-
look of this literature is not animated by selfishness or by a hectic pursuit of
honor but by a search for moderation.
Signs of moderation in the sagas are regularly attributed to Christian influence.
But the concept of moderation is older than Christianity and has hardly been
a notable feature of Christian teaching. What we probably have in the sagas is
not so much the replacement of a pagan ideal with a Christian ideal as the re-
placement of a warrior ideal with a social ideal. C. M. Bowra has drawn a dis-
tinction between heroic epics, which embody an individual ideal, and literary
 Displacement of the Heroic Ideal in the Family Sagas 593
epics which embody just such a social ideal.34 Whether or not his distinction
holds true for epics, it makes a very useful distinction between Germanic heroic
poetry and Icelandic family sagas. In heroic poetry it is not the life of the com-
munity but the stature of the individual which is important. Sigurd is slain, but
his prowess lives on:
Sigurb'r var J)6 allra framarstr, oc hann kalla allir menn i fornfrceoum um alia tnenn
fram oc gofgastan herkonunga.36
But Sigurd was the most prominent of all and everyone familiar with ancient matters
says that he was above all men and the greatest of warrior kings.
Gunnarr and Hggni may choose life or death, but since life would compromise
their honor, they prefer death and surrender themselves to Atli's perfidy. HamSir
and Sojli, faced with the obligation of vengeance, undertake a suicidal attack on
Ermanaric. There is no suggestion of moral alternatives in these heroic fables;
they eulogize the individual who does what honor demands and despises the
consequences. The situation of the Germanic hero is morally simple. The situ-
ation of the saga hero is more complicated; his morality does not lie in the ad-
herence to a few rigid principles but in his social instincts and his response to
various social contingencies. He lives in a world of interaction and of limitations
imposed by society on individual assertiveness. The highest values hi this society
are flexibility and moderation.
The difference between the heroic ethic and the morality of the family sagas is
perhaps to be explained by the supposition that the heroic lays reflect the values
of a warrior class while the sagas reflect the values of Icelandic society at large.
A warrior class allows some scope for individual aggressiveness, a normal society
does so to a lesser degree. The family sagas, despite all the heroic modes and
gestures borrowed from tradition, portray a normal society. They tell the stories
of strong individuals who disrupt the social fabric, but despite the respect paid
many of these strong personalities, the sagas are ultimately opposed to social
disruption. This is why the heroic lay regularly ends on a note of individual gran-
deur while the saga, from its social vantage point, always ends with conciliation
and with the restoration of social balance.
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
34
C. M. Bowra, From Virgil to Milton (London, 1963), pp. 9-10.
36
From "Fra Dau'Sa Sinfjotla," Edda: Die Lieder des Codex Regius, ed. Hans Kuhn (Heidelberg,
1962), p. 163.